have join us tonight but we want to really see you in about three seconds on gretawire. good night from washington, d.c. the o'reilly factor is on tonight. >> these are glitches that gorel way beyond the pale of what should be expected. >>ra now, president obama's inner circle is criticizing obamacare. it is shaping up to be a major disaster for american workers. >> we will have the latest.l ha >> and nobody can explain it, but it does president mean wetht should make up stories like children to explain. muc >> your saying there isn't aliev good is as much as those who believe. an nbc correspondent ss yes. we will tell you what that is all about. >> i just think it's congress. >> i think probably the republicans are getting blamed but i don't know if they deserve it. >> just who is responsible for causing pain to
american military families? we did an on-the-street report. stossel has the results. >> what would you like to have seen the president done? >> resign. >> caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone. the factor begins right now. ♪ ♪ >> hi, i'm bill o'reilly. thanks for watching us tonight. the government shutdown stuff will be solved this week. but because i don't want to bore you to tears, i'm not going it cover the never ending back and forth. if anything dramatic happens this hour my pal shepard smith standing by on the news desk. the whole thing is a political charade and everybody knows it now the talking points memo about something important. the collapse of obama care. it's happening right before our eyes. this woman, secretary of health and human services kathleen sebelius has totally botched the rollout
of the government mandated insurance program. this is so bad that even if you want to sign up, chances are you cannot. at least that's what cnn senior medical correspondent elizabeth cohen is reporting. >> i have been trying since day one to get an account and log in on healthcare.gov. i failed again. >> we couldn't make this page work. >> and again. >> it wouldn't log me in. >> and again. >> it's not working. >> when i called the 1-800 number for help, the reps tell me volume is high and to try again during off peak hours. so i tried at 10:30 at night. 7:00 in the morning. and still, it didn't work. so finally, i set my alarm clock for 3:00 a.m. sunday morning. but, guess what? the system was down for maintenance. >> maintenance? a joke. the system has been down since its inception two weeks ago. and you know what? it's never going to work. because the whole obama care concept is impossible
to understand. simply a giant mess. even president obama's inner circle knows that. >> this is excruciatingly embracing for the white house and the department of health and human services. this was bungled badly. i hope they are working day and night to get this done. when they get it fixed, i hope they fire some people that were in charge of making sure that this thing was supposed to work. we knew there were going to be some glitches, right? but these are glitches that go quite frankly way beyond the pale of what should be expected. >> it is troubling to say the least that president obama will not acknowledge the problems obama care is having. all president obama has to do is grant a one year delay for individuals and families just like he did for american's can. give the folks a break, mr. president. your vision is not working right now. maybe you can fix it why inflict pain on the folks? somebody wants to go through the hoops to sign up for obama care? fine with me. but most americans would rather wait until the system is ready. and they know how much
obama care is going to cost them. last night talking points reported on an investigation by the chicago tribune this as many workers in illinois are getting hammered by obama care costs. the stark truth is this. if you are making money, you will pay more for your healthcare. that's because the president and his party want to give free healthcare to the poor. the only way to do that is to take from those who have. there is no other way. as we have reported from the very beginning, president obama wants to redistribute income. that's his political philosophy. almost everything he does leads in that direction. higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy. higher local taxes. higher energy taxes. higher taxes if you want a vehicle. in fact, right now the feds are receiving more tax money from us than ever before in the history of the country. and where is all of the tax money going? to those who do notvery much. food stamps have exploded. disability payments off the chart. new entitlement programs all day long. the american people elected president obama twice.
he told us he was a moderate. he told us healthcare costs would generally go down. we now know those things are not true. that's the memo. now for top story tonight, reaction. with us monica crowley and alan colmes. what do you think of the gibbs sound bite. >> i think he is right. we are talking about two different things here the implementation it problems. those people should be fired. versus the policy itself. to say obama that care itself is not work something one thing which is not true. so say that the implementation is not work something a different issue. two different issues. >> i don't think if obama care can be working if americans can't sign up. >> many of them are. >> how many? >> well, there has been i think 800,000 so far. >> where did you get that figure? >> that's what's been reported in the news? >> by whom? who reported that? i never heard that. >> press service. >> the government will not give out any stats and numbers. >> however, what really is going to happen is that eventually people are going to like it and get into it. >> how do you know? >> because people have already decided they like no punishment for preexisting conditions,
portability, staying on until 26. >> why do the say most people oppose obama care? >> i think getting a lot of bad press. bad messaging in getting it out. >> i don't believe colmes' figure people signing up is even close. the government went geoff out any and i have seen no reportage of anything like that. and say? >> you could add a couple of things over president obama. 2008, he talked about the fundamental transformation of the nation. this is it remember that obama care was never about healthcare, never about health insurance. it was never about expanding access it. it was about one thing which was about government power and control. this is socialized medicine. this is about the expanding government beyond its limits in order to lock as many people into dependency as possible. >> you can't say it was never about healthcare because it does help people with preexisting conditions. so you can't make that statement. >> that is a superficial.
superficial issue. >> if you have a heart condition and you couldn't get insured out of an astronomical rate and now you can that's a benefit. we have to stay on track here. >> why did they have to radicalize and take over one sixth of the economy in order to get that accomplished. >> they didn't. they could have carved that out. >> not about healthcare or health insurance. socialized medicine is the crown jewel of the socialist state. this is what you were talking about higher taxes, all of this is built into. why do you think obama and the left when the economy was collapsing when he came n january of '09 went straight after healthcare. >> also, there is a political reason because it evenings everybody. >> can i answer that, please? >> no. i'm not answered in the philosophical argument tonight. i'm interested in nuts and bolts. you, yourself, said that gibbs was correct. >> yes. on the implementation of the plan. >> on the implementation. what is the responsibility of the federal government which imposes this demands that you do it or punishes
you? >> here is what i would do. >> bill bill wait for the question. the federal government will punish you if you kent go along with them. yet by they have by your own admission monica and i agree. they have botched it, all right? so now with you are basically saying we the corporal government have botched it. stem won't go along that's unfair, colmes. >> that's right. let those who want to sign up sign up. those who had trouble give them a grace period stuff. >> you realize your career is over? >> you don't want to be on my side. it's not good for you. >> one of the first times you are using common sense and fairness. your career for the people who follow you, done. all right? now, if even colmes is in? >> even colmes. >> they did that to me already. you are not lonely on that. if we are all in on delay for a year, which is fair,
okay. it's your fault, mr. president, you picked sebelius, your fault. okay? so, why won't he do? t.? >> look. >> why won't he do it? >> this administration has had three and a half years to get the flipping web site up and running. >> and they can't or won't. >> how do you think they will run the actual healthcare system. >> you are dodging my question why won't he do it. will you stop and just answer it. >> you are talking about a man who is a total idealogue who is not interested in whether this works or not. hes trying to get to us single payer. >> doesn't care whether this works or not. >> trying to get us to single payer, bill. >> take your advice and give a year's waiver. >> stubbornness. it's not his fault, per se. it is whoever they hired to do this. >> who is they? he is in charge? , did he he hire the computer company? he hired sebelius. >> did he he do the window
as sweep the floor. he hired her and she is in charge. >> you don't fire the bat boy if the team is in last place. >> you don't fire the owner either. >> single piece of administration and can't make it work. >> certainly administrative. >> what does that tell you? he is an idealogue moving to the fundamental transformation of the immigration this is single part of it. >> he says he up doesn't care about the books all ideology. >> not about you or me. >> let him finish. >> hello. if i canning up the logistics. inflating them and that is wrong. >> i want everybody to understand colmes is demanding one year waiver for individuals and families. next or on the rundown, john stossel on hot folks think is responsible for bringing pain to american
military families. later, why is the american media so insulting about religion? we'll tell you upcoming. huh...fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. yep, everybody knows that. well, did you know the ancient pyramids were actually a mistake? uh-oh. geico. fifteen minutes could save you...well, you know.
stossel matter segment tonight. who is to blame for humiliating some american military families. you know the story. benefits didn't to families who lost loved ones killed in action in afghanistan all because of the government shutdown? this morning, we asked 10 americans on the streets of new york to assess blame. >> well, congress, i mean, everyone is just blaming everyone else and it's ridiculous. >> overall, the government, particularly the guy in the white house. >> i just think all branches of the government. i men, the democrats and republicans, the senate, the house, i think them all. >> i live on a farm in a rural area. i really don't pay very close attention. >> it depends on which media you are watching. i think republicans are are being blind but ultimately the president is blind.
>> congress and the senate. >> i think the republicans are getting blamed but i don't know if they deserve it. >> i have no -- sorry. i'm not awake yet. >> here now to analyze fox business anchor john stossel. first of all, who do you think is to blame? >> the president. because he could have just made it go away. but the republicans who thankfully are saying stop. enough with the spending and we have a partial thoughtdown that is good. >> i lay it on president obama because of executive order capability that he has. given to the president of the united states when there is a situation like this. all right, that needs to be protect find quickly. for the vox of the peb he opens up the funding for a specification thing. can he do that under our constitution. he chose not to do it. hard to say why he chose. he event tweafl signed the law that the snas meantime of the debate and all of that, there was five or six day period where the families are going we're
not -- we don't have -- we can't even bury our people. it was embarrassing and hue millating for the whole country, was it not? >> it was. it's $3 million. that's what he spent on his hawaii vacation just traveling there they could have easily fixed this. >> easily. and there is far worse stuff going on in america. i'm glad you pointed this out. >> i don't think there is is worse stuff going on as far as the damage to the nation's fabric than this. you saw the demonstrations in washington over the weekend where the veterans actually went to the white house and let their anger be known. see, look, this is a short-term thing and the fisher house we have them coming up behind you. we'll -- stepped in and all of that. i understand that. aren't you worried as an american, not as a libertarian or business news guy, aren't you worried that there is no leadership in washington right now? we just don't have anybodywho e anything? >> i never trusted politicians to be my leader and solve things. i think when we trust them to lead, they lead us astray.
i like limited government. so i have never wanted leadership from washington. >> all right. but as an american, looking at the country in the place of the world, our place in the world, we have -- i'm trying to think back, jimmy carter was a weak leader. >> gerald ford i don't think was a strong leader on the republican side. >> fdr was a strong leader and look what it got us. >> well, we won world war ii. >> i'm trying to fair to president obama but i see him now. i really see him as a week, we leader way down. >> as a weak leader he is sure imposing his will on america getting obama care through. >> that's all he got through. he didn't get anything else through. he got obama care through. the rest of it has been smoke and mirrors building it up. all right. so you are not particularly worried though you? are not worried about this country? i know stossel will be okay.
>> yeah i'm totally worried. we're promising medicare recipients we have enough money to pay for their healthcare and we don't. >> we don't. social security, too. >> dodd thank and obama care will kill the. >> dodd frank and the 157,000 other regulations that they have got. >> john stossel, everybody. directly ahead, as mentioned, the head of the fisher house, which rescued the grieving families will be here. he is angry tonight. then, later, is it legal on a transgendered high school student allegedly bothering girls in the bathroom. we predicted this would happen. right back with those reports.
factor follow up seeing many tonight much the fisher house stepped up to help those who were denied benefits because of the government shutdown. this has not been a smooth experience for the fisher house. here now the chairman of that organization ken fisher. so, i want to advance the story here. all right? so last week the president signs the law that opens up the treasury to pay the benefits $100,000 to each family of kia in afghanistan at this point. your organization then does what? >> well, at that point we were told we were no longer needed. >> by whom? by the pentagon who said that since the president has signed the bill, fisher house was no lonk irneeded in the capacity that we were engaged in throughout the week. >> did the secretary of defense hagel tell tell that you? >> no, actually it kind of came to us -- do you know what, bill? it's funny but when you think about how it came to us? i don't even recall. i don't even actually recall who actually called
us it was a wasn't a letter stand down did you ever talk to hagel. >> hagel did call me to thank me, yes. >> god for him. that's the first report we have had of him being involved in this at all. he called to thank thank you. good. president obama, heard from him? >> no. >> and any of his guys? any of his advisors? any of those people? we heard from valerie jarrett. >> that's good because she is his main person. >> um. >>um they were respectful to your organization. now you are going to give $25,000 to each family. why are you going to do that if the government is going to provide the 100,000? >> it's taken already two weeks and it's going to take longer as far as we know the families have not received their checks yet. they may not receive them for the rest of the week. >> is there a sense of urgency on the part of the federal government to help these people? >> you know, bill, i think that's what kind of angered me the most that throughout this whole episode there
was no sense of urgency from anybody. that it took constant pounding from you and from other people like you to get this issue front and center. and -- >> so they weren't proactive and calling you let's work together and get this sorted out. that's how i read it i'm happy to hear that there were big time obama administration officials at least being respectful to your organization now, you work with the families. and you know how much pain this caused the family because, number one, you are grieving for your loved one who is dead. number two, most of these people don't have a lot of money. they are military families. they can't be fly from the west coast to the east coast and you have got to move the coffin and you have got to set it all up. are the families themselves outraged? we saw the veterans, by the way, over the weekend. saw that you? >> yes. >> the veterans are really mad and they are not going to forget it. >> as they shouldn't. >> the families, how are they reacting? >> you know what, bill? we haven't had any contact
with the families. they are grieving families, obviously. we have not had contact because we haven't really -- we are still in the process of sending out these checks? >> but you know who they're, these families, correct? >> of course we know who they are. >> you didn't intrude on them why calling them. >> never. >> send them the money with the explanation this is from the fisher house and you use it the way you want to use it. >> yes. >> that's all private money bay the way, ladies and gentlemen. >> that will not be reimbursed by the federal government. >> in is charitable money from us we americans to the fisher house and in addition sooner or later when the feds get around to it they will get their $100,000 tribute? >> that's right. >> mr. fisher, you do great work. we have been with you for many years. you are a real patriot for stepping up here. >> thank you, bill. >> if you would l help the fisher house. the web site is fisher house.org. plenty more ahead as the factor moves along this evening. it's sad but many in the national media continue to demean religion in this
world in which we live in, specifically with the snark ismedia, is that valued. it's very easy to come after people of faith no matter what their religion, jewish, protestant, muslim, hindu, that you are sort of tagged with this label of being puritanicle and not understanding others of a different viewpoint. i think that's kind of, it's lazy, number one, and i think it's just something that feeds the snickering masses if you will in that regard. >> and he is a perfect example of the snark last thursday in "u.s.a. today" the book guy bob wrote after bill o'reilly's interview with "60 minutes" in which he said he was inspired by the holy ghost to write his new book kill jesus moves from number two to number one. the anti-christian people don't want you to read killing jesus unquote. joining us from washington fox news media analyst
howard kurtz. do you agree, first of all, with russert? >> i agree with luke russert that in much of the mainstream media there is a weariness, a condescension and good for him for speaking out by the way toward very religious people. he goes too far in saying there is an effort to come after people of faith. to me it's more of a cultural divide, bill, based in part on ignorance because the mainstream media, particularly in the big city tends to be a very secular business. >> when you say a cultural divide though, what does that mean? so you are a secular person living in manhattan or georgetown, d.c. or malibu, california. so what? you are comfortable in your ago no, gnosticism or whatever it is you embrace. why would you try to somebody who believes. >> many people in those cities may be, you know, church-going christians or synagogue-attending jews. there aren't, for example, a lot of evangelical christians in those ranks. so, they almost seem like an alien species at times.
so, when you get televangelists or politicians who wear their religion oon their sleeves get them into trouble. not only an effort to pounce on that but also maybe a lack of understanding of what they believe in their heart. >> there has got to be a reason why they do it it for example, the priest scandal in the catholic church was met with glee in much of the liberal press and they used its a a hammer. >> glee? it was a horrifying story. >> it may be a horrifying story but don't you tell me you don't know how much they enjoyed printing the horror because they celebrated it and the columnists went wild. i will give you examples i mean all day long. huffington post, a guy named larry doyle, bill maher on hbo. joan walsh on msnbc. a bunch of gay activists. a bunch of abortion people, all day long. just hammering everybody in the catholic churches is an idiot. all the priests are perverts. and you know what happened. you saw it happen. so, i mean -- >> -- well, i don't think
that applies to the reporters at the "boston globe" who first broke that story you were mentioning some liberal pundits. here is another side to it history channel rungs a series called the bible. >> that's the folks. that's not the media. >> run by msnbc. here is another example important one pope francis has gotten glowing coverage and deservedly so. >> why is it deservedly so because pope benedict did not get glowing coverage. i know the reason why pope francis is getting glowing coverage do you want to tell. >> you will say it's because is he more tolerant towards gays at least in his. >> absolutely. no doubt about it? >> but he is also a very media savvy pope. he is a humble leader and i think he is on twitter and i think that a lot of people who aren't each christians. >> you are making my point for he me. the left is basically against religion because religion opposes things like gay marriage and abortion. that's what it is all about. all right? so a guy like me then who
writes this book and i firmly believe that the secular national media doesn't want anybody to buy this book, and i will point to the fact that very few have even mentionedned it. i mean, this is the far and away the best selling book in the world. >> it is but was it cbs "60 minutes" who put you on to talk about "killing jesus?" >> that's a different animal. a reportage program. they report on what is happening in america. >> a lot of people jumped on you for saying that you woke up out of a dream and you felt that god. >> i didn't wake up out of a dream. i simply put forth what every christian believes if he or she is a christian that inspiration comes from god. that there is an interacting god. that was used, as you know, all right. >> yes. i'm agreeing with you. there is nothing remarkable about that statement for pattern of faith it was used to attack you. people don't like you. at the same time, you love to take on your critic its on this and it helps you
sell more books. >> that's not my primary motivation for talking about what i did. why did they attack me? why did they use that, which is all that is an expression of what every christian believes, why would they use that to attack me? why? >> you have a lot of detractors out there, bill, happy to take anything that you say that is, quote, controversial. and i'm not saying this was controversial. >> why not say it's a boring book like somebody said, which is unbelievable but they did. why attack me on the religion end? >> well, i think where you and i disagree is. >> no, no. answer the question. why attack me on the religion end? >> because, to some people in the media, and clearly people who are not big fans of yours, saying that you were inspired by god to write this book sounds like oh, he is kind of a fanatic. everybody is. >> all christians are inspired by god to do things. and that's the -- i will tell you why they did it because they were playing to their crew, all right? their crew despises religion and any expression
of it. and that is what these people were playing to. that's why the u.s.a. guy put that in there. playing to his antireligion crew. think about it. and that is what is wrong with the national media a littlek and they all think the same. >> the media is a very big sprawling animal. there are many religious people in the media i will give you, this there is a cultural divide and i think there should be more better and more sympathetic coverage of organized religion. >> all right. thank you very much. is it legal? three top hot topics for you. transgendered student bothering girls in the bathroom. washington redskins controversy. we are coming right back. [ male announcer ] this is karen and jeremiah.
thanks for staying with us. imbill o'reilly. you know with the state of michigan trying to ban affirmative action. the supreme court decide whether attorneys can do that. with us is kimberly guilfoyle and lis wiehl. why does michigan want to stop affirmative action? >> michigan voters say it's fundamentally unfair to vote people into universities or let them enter based on race. race should not be a factor. >> when did they decide that? >> 2006 they passed a referendum. 58%. >> seven years ago. >> a 8% of the voters in
michigan voted for this referendum. the court in michigan then overturned that referendum saying it violated equal protection. >> a lower federal court? >> a lower federal court. >> sixth circuit of appeals. >> who suing by the way? who wants to overthrow the will of the people inmichigan? >> ork, well, let me explain something really quickly here. in 2003 the high court upheld the university of michigan's school of law. >> which high court? >> law standard. this is basically the -- well, the appeals court, right? the federal court. then it went to the appeals court. now it's in front of the u.s. supreme court. what is expected, because the composition of the court has changed, sandra day o'connor is not there anymore, that they are going to say this referendum. this will of the people is going to be upheld. >> okay. >> that's the sequence of events. >> who is challenging. >> a group of civil rights advocates. >> civil rights people who want. >> defend o. firmive action. >> how many states right now have no affirmative action in, say, universities in hiring? do we know? >> california just the
ninth circuit said the referendum that the california passed banning affirmative action was okay. so the reason the supreme court took this is because now. >> i'm just wondering how many states have this kind of stuff. we don't know? we'll find out. >> this is a ripe issue that they have tried to not. >> i'm agreeing. >> the supreme court is going it uphold no affirmative statements in action that states voted it out. >> the voters voted for this it. >> a big states rights issue. >> this is in colorado. we predicted this would happen here. the left wing press went wild. more and more school districts are saying that if you are a transgendered person, you know, they are not subjective. you you don't have to prove that you can two and use any bathroom you want. any locker room you want. >> right. >> what's happening, guilfoyle in colorado. >> challenging situation. there is also a parallel from california we talked about previously on this program in colorado you have female students made to feel very uncomfortable these are from the reports
specific justice institute. legal defense organization representing some of these girls and their parents that there is a a transgendered boy that is allowed to go in and use the women's room and some days he use us the men's room. when they encountered him in the women's room, allegation, statement was made inappropriate are regarding their physical. >> commenting on physical appearance. >> i spoke with the institute today he told me the allegations are commenting on appearance. >> what are they suing the school to stop it. >> they haven't sued yet. what the institute did was sent a letter three days ago to the school saying if you do not respond within five days, we will file in federal court for privacy issues. >> we knew this was going to happen. >> the additional allegations are that these girls are being made to feel intimidated because the school is really taking the side of the transgendered student. >> sure. they made that policy. of course they are. you say we have to slap the word allegations here. >> if there is a whole bunch of them then that
school district is in trouble. all right, rebekah an sedgwick. young girl in florida. she jumped off a tower. >> right. >> committed suicide, 12 years old. now the police have arrested whom? >> according to the poke county sheriff, they have arrested two girls. 12 and 14 years old. two juveniles. they have charged them with third degree felony aggravated stalking carry up to five years as an adult. >> stalking this girl for up to a year to the point where she finally she kissed her mother good night and killed herself. >> in person? >> this is extension of the law now to include cyber bullying which i think is a good use of the law. >> two girls? >> two girls that constantly were demeaning her and mocking her in person and on the internet. i understand there were more, too. >> allegation apparently of a physical altercation as well. >> there were more girls as well. this is just the two. >> these are the two main culprits saying why don't you drink bleach and die?
you should kill yourself? >> how long did this go on? >> this went on for over two years. >> was the school aware it was happening? >> the school was aware the girl switched schools. had to be home schooled. so pervasive online. >> so the two girls arrested in florida are 13, 14? >> 12 and 13. rebekah was 12 years of age at the time. >> they can do time in juvenile detention center. >> florida let's the prosecution decide whether they're going to be tried as juveniles or adults. >> taking it very seriously. >> they have to. you can't have this. >> all right. ladies, thanks very much. krauthammer on deck. the washington redskins. should the team be forced to change its name? krauthammer moments away.
tonight. should the washington pro-he football team banish its nickname redskins? sports guy bob does stats says yes. >> ask yourself what the equivalent would be if , hispanics,ard asians or members of any other ethnic group. when considered that way redskins can't possibly honor a heritage or a noble character trait nor can it possibly be considered a neutral term. it's an insult, a slur, no matter how benign the present they intend. >> also president obama has implied he would change the name. joining us from washington sports fan charles krauthammer. all right. i don't think people understand the genesis of the name though redskins. it came from newfoundland, canada, did you know that? >> newfoundland, canada, yeah, that used to be a part of britain, i believe. >> yes. and when the settlers came over, they were warring with the indians up there
who used red paint, all right, that was the ritual before they fought. so, therefore, the word red skins meant indian fighters and that's how it came into the fighters, and so that is how it came into the lexicon. and now, we have a politically correct society, and i am not saying it with derision. it is going after redskins because it sounds like it is a pigmentation thing, what do you say? >> i say the settlers landed years ago, i don't like being lectured by sports casters, i don't like the president me about ethnic etiquette, or implying there is a race card.
but what i do believe is the people using redskins are not intending any malice, or anything like that. but i do believe that words change, evolve. you talk about what it meant 3 or 300 years ago. 50 years ago, the word "negro" was the most respected work you could use for an african-american. the "i have a dream" speech, it is now, because of a complicated history, which nobody intended the word today implies a patronizing attitude. if i asked you how many african-americans are in the congress, you wouldn't say 45 negros, because you understand because of your intent, the word has an acquired connotation, because -- that is the point i
want to make about redskins, it has an 80-year history, but in 80 years the meaning of the word changes. >> but you don't hear an outcry from native americans across the board. the oneidas, based in the northeast, they're driving this, they don't like it. but you don't hear it, it is not taken as a bejard in many native american precincts. like you said if you used the word "negro itself. it would be in the african-american community. it is hard to defend redskins in this politically correct time. the owner doesn't want to change the name because there is a lot of history to it, legacy to it. it is not a bejorative to him, because it denotes strength, and he doesn't want to change it. i kind of have sympathy for him on this one. >> look, i do, too, i don't
believe it is an easy call, i happen to come out on the other side and i respect the people who say it has a lot of history and emotional attachment to it. but if i were to ask you how many indian-americans or native-americans were in the congress, you wouldn't say two redskins, because regardless of the intent you wouldn't use the word. you talked about some native americans don't like the word. others are not offended. when i was young, i used the word gip as a synonym for cheat, and later i found out it was a shortened term for gypsies, i didn't ask rome how they went, i simply thought it was the decent thing to do. you don't want to deliberately associate somebody or a group with something negative like
cheating. and if you can use -- >> but i don't think strength is a negative. and by the way, if you do away with the redskins, you have to do away with "hail to the redskins," i have seen you sing it, krauthammerer -- i have seen you sing it. >> i have seen you hum it! okay, it can't be hail to the butterflies. >> how about hail to the skins. >> and next week, things that matter will be in the marketplace. so you might want to pre order it. factor tip of the day, a very funny column i thi
on the way, i know because i'm signing tons of books already for christmas gifts, this season, we have a super duo for you, "killing kennedy" and killing lincoln together, we have a fabulous gift. the terrific under the tree play this year, please get the orders in quickly, as i said, if you become a billo'reilly.com member, and if you're a citizen at birth, you qualify. bill, you should be ashamed of yourself not knowing the constitution, ted cruz was born in canada but can run for president. actually, believe it doesn't address the constitution, but you are correct. i researched it this morning, she is free to do that, you religious nuts are intolerant, i guess you're referring to me, there. mike, i'm accurate, not
intolerant, the drive is not about jingle bells, it is about christmas carols, and the reporter who is being politically correct. and stu, how do you call yourself fair when you refer to obama care as bad for the country? you should simply report that some feel it is bad, others feel it is good. let me break it to you, stu, it is my job to define politics, that is what i am paid to do as an analyst, i believe ted cruz will help the republican cause because everybody know who ohs opposed it. just read "killing jesus," thought it was stunning, i was deeply moved. thought there was no way you could top killing lincoln, but i was wrong. chris in texas, i don't watch you anymore because you don't believe in the trueness of the bible.
lisp tonight. you may remember actor rick moranis became famous in "ghost busters," and "honey i shrunk the kids". >> i planned a little kickoff surprise, we are going to use marshm molecules. and gum drops to >> he walked away from the entertainment industry in order to raise his two children. moranis is a man and a good guy to boot. he wrote this column, the tip of the day, check out rick moranis in "the wall street journal." we would like you to spout off about the factor, anywhere in the world, o'reilly